Political Philosophy and Ethics discussion
Introductions
>
New Member Introductions
Hi Guys,This is a polite introduction about myself. My name is Cathal Haughian. I was born in Ireland. My friends and I from the Financial Times have just finished a pretty tough challenge: The Philosophy of Capitalism.
We gave it our best shot so I hope you like it. It was written by government officers, including from the security apparatus, and senior capitalists from the US/UK/Germany/France/Russia/China.
You may wonder how I got so many competitors/enemies to cooperate. Well, I wrote the first edition, and my thesis was that the present system framework was leading us to World War or Revolutions.
They were convinced and agreed to work as a team. 13 editions later we have a final draft. I hope you enjoy it. And I have a free PDF available. My intellectual friends are quite wealthy/powerful so I can afford to send free paperbacks. By all means get in touch:
http://beforethecollapse.com/2015/11/...
haughian@hushmail.com
Regards,
Cathal
Mod
This is a polite introduction about myself. My name is Cathal Haughian. I was born in Ireland. My friends and I from the Financial Times have just finished a pretty tough challenge: The P..."
Welcome to the group, Cathal. Your book looks interesting, and I have put the Kindle version (I'm running out of space in my house for paper books) on my Amazon and Goodreads Wish Lists. I may not get to it for awhile, since I have a number of other books already scheduled to read first. Question: Is the July 2015 edition currently on Amazon the latest edition, or do you have another edition coming out in the near future?
Mod
Hello all. I have a B.A. (Hons) in Philosophy from Durham University, graduating as a mature student in 1990. The most fascinating three years of my life! Just th..."
Welcome to the group, Georgina! We have quite a few Brits (as well as many other people around the globe) in this group. Although some of us reside in the US, please don't feel bashful about contributing. If Trump (the original "ugly American"?) wins the presidential election in November, I may be moving to another country anyway! But perhaps Trump is more popular in the UK, since the House of Commons evidently couldn't succeed in banning Trump from your country. Note: I don't normally comment on current political matters, but these are exceptional times.
Mod
Great! Let us know when it is published.
Mod
Welcome, Franco, to this group. I will open up topics on Kant and Hegel as well Rousseau within the next hour. I probably will not contribute much to these topics in the near future, as I am currently focused on Plato and other philosophers, but you and others are welcome to post discussions under these new topics as well as others. If you or others wish to create a topic on another philosopher not otherwise listed (e.g., Fichte), please use the format of the other topic titles, i.e., the philosopher's full name with the years of his/her birth and death in parentheses.
I wish you the best of luck regarding admission to graduate school at the University of Chicago. I received an A.B. (Political Science, 1968) and A.M. (Humanities, 1971) there.
Hi all,New group member here. I started a series of anthologies under the heading of "The Wicked Problems Collaborative." Our first book, "What do we do about inequality?" which looks at inequality in a wide variety of forms (race, class, wealth, access, income, access, etc.) was released in January. I'm personally writing a follow on to Book 1 because I had too much left on the drawing board that I wanted to share.
We're just getting started on Book 2, which will focus on the rapidly evolving technological environment with the goal of helping the reader think through the potential impacts to our lives, especially impacts to cornerstones like employment. If you have any questions about either book, I'd be happy to answer them.
As for my background, I work as a sustainable business consultant and i previously worked in the grocery industry in the U.S. where I led the zero waste programs at Albertsons and SuperValu. I have an MBA from Washington University in St. Louis, and a MA in Environmental Management from Harvard University. I'm a Fellow of the RSA, and the organization's "connector" for Thailand.
I'm happy to have the opportunity to connect.
Chris
Mod
New group member here. I started a series of anthologies under the heading of "The Wicked Problems Collaborative." Our first book, "What do we do about inequality?" which looks at inequalit..."
Thanks for the information, Chris, and welcome to the group. I've put your book on my Goodreads "Want to Read" list and Amazon Kindle Wish List. I hope to get to it in the near future. Please keep us posted as to new releases. You may also wish to post a brief summary of the book in the Publications of Group Members topic of this group. Please also feel free to contribute to the other topics, as appropriate.
Alan wrote: "Chris wrote: "Hi all,New group member here. I started a series of anthologies under the heading of "The Wicked Problems Collaborative." Our first book, "What do we do about inequality?" which look..."
Thanks, Alan. I'll do that.
Hello! Glad to be part of the group. My name is John, I was an Art major in my undergrad at Bard College. Years after college I continued to read and become interested in philosophy and politics. This led me to currently pursue a public policy/admin Masters degree at DePaul in Chicago. I really love to talk about the philosophical foundations of the political realm so I am excited about this group. A few of my favorite political philosophers are the following: Rawls, Okin, Habermas, Tronto, Foucault, Popper, Arendt, Kant, Tocqueville, Berlin, Chomsky. Thanks and look forward to discussion!
Mod
Welcome to the group, John. I lived in Chicago from 1964 to 1970 during my undergraduate and graduate studies at the University of Chicago. I've only been back to visit twice since then, and I'm sure the city has changed a lot since I was there. I can see you are well read and look forward to your contributions.
Hi, I'm Mark. I have a Bachelor's in Philosophy and Politics from Oberlin College and a Master's in Philosophy from the University of Maryland. I was on track to get my PhD, but life happened - health issues. I wrote my undergraduate thesis, confused as it was, on HLA Hart, and was rather interested in the philosophy of law.I was generally interested in political and legal philosophy, and to a lesser extent, normative ethics. I wasn't really interested in metaethics and moral psychology. I had some side interests in rational choice theory and philosophy of social science.
Mod
Welcome, Mark. Please feel free to contribute to discussions as you deem appropriate.
Greetings,
My background is mental health. I hold a M.S. in Community Counseling from Emporia State University. Philosophy has always interested me as a hobby. I look forward to reading posts from the experienced professionals and learning.
My background is mental health. I hold a M.S. in Community Counseling from Emporia State University. Philosophy has always interested me as a hobby. I look forward to reading posts from the experienced professionals and learning.
Mod
My background is mental health. I hold a M.S. in Community Counseling from Emporia State University. Philosophy has always interested me as a hobby. I look forward to reading posts fro..."
Welcome to this group, Gail.
Hello, I am studying engineering, pursuing Masters degree in China but have a keen interest in Philosophy and literature. Found this group and joined in. I hope this would be a great place to learn and discuss related topics.
Mod
My name is Fred Lucas. I am a journalist and author working in Washington, D.C. surrounded by politics. Looking forward to being part of this group to look at deeper questions.
Mod
Welcome to this group, Fred. I see that you are the author of several books, evidently of the conservative persuasion. We have group members of all political views. Although we avoid the partisan political battles du jour, we do welcome, as you say, discussions of the "deeper questions" of political philosophy and/or ethics.
Joined GR soon as my historical fiction novel was published by SHB. I'm a former federal employee in D.C.--various budget and managerial job series during five admins beginning with Carter and ending with Bush Jr. (NASA, GSA, USDA). I now split my time between Virginia and the west coast, and I run Algonkian conferences and workshops for aspiring authors--a rewarding endeavor as long as the narcissists can be avoided. Btw, I have two children. My daughter is a public interest attorney in NYC and a devoted supporter of the Bern, while my son works as a special effects artist for a video game promoter in Novato, CA. I'm a proud daddy who sees no retirement in his future. My current novel is an adult historical fantasy represented by Talcott Notch Literary Agency. Catherine the Great is the heroine. I had enormous fun when writing it and plan to do more!
Mod
Welcome to the group, Michael, and congratulations on all your accomplishments.
My home page contains an outline of my background. In somewhat more detail, I obtained an undergraduate degree in Philosophy and Economics (double major) in 1970, and thereafter obtained a Ph. D. in Economics with a concentration in History of Economic Thought and Political Economy in 1976. Finding that positions were limited in my specialty and that academics was not what I thought it was, I went back to graduate school in Law on a very generous fellowship and stipend in 1983.
Upon graduation with a J.D. in 1986, I have practiced in Chapter 11 and high ticket collection in mostly medium to large firms in Phoenix, Arizona to date. My interests are listed on my page.
I am not certain that I believe that there is such a thing as political philosophy since my orientation has long been that of a "philosophic anarchist" and my training in Philosophy was mostly in ordinary language analysis and history of Philosophy. (All of which tends to create a skeptical frame of mind.)
Mod
Welcome to the group, Craig. You have a very impressive background, You and I have read many of the same books, and we both abandoned an academic for a law career for similar reasons, though I gave up after obtaining an A.M. degree and did not pursue a Ph.D.
Re your statement "I am not certain that I believe that there is such a thing as political philosophy since my orientation has long been that of a 'philosophic anarchist' and my training in Philosophy was mostly in ordinary language analysis and history of Philosophy. (All of which tends to create a skeptical frame of mind.)":
Although I also have a skeptical frame of mind, I do think there is such a thing as political philosophy. As Leo Strauss once wrote, "philosophy is necessarily preceded by opinions about the whole. It is, therefore, the attempt to replace opinions about the whole by knowledge of the whole. . . . Of philosophy thus understood, political philosophy is a branch. Political philosophy will then be the attempt to replace opinion about the nature of political things by knowledge of the nature of political things." What Is Political Philosophy? and Other Studies (Glencoe, IL: Free Press, 1959), 11-12.
I must admit that I have no interest in analytic philosophy. It's too abstract for me. We don't discuss metaphysics, ontology, or epistemology in this group except insofar as such discussions relate to political philosophy and/or ethics. Stand-alone discussions of analytic philosophy, metaphysics, ontology, epistemology, and so forth are more appropriate in other groups, e.g., the "Philosophy" Goodreads group. As this group's Moderator, I recently had to delete a topic on "Martin Heidegger" because people were starting to engage in ad hominem arguments in a postmodern equivalent of the medieval metaphysical question of how many angels can stand on the head of a pin.
Considering your background, however, I'm sure you will have some interesting contributions to our discussions.
Hi everyone,My Kindle eBook:
The Purification Social Order - Part 2 of 4: Part 2: The essential policies of the purification social order (1/2)
will be on free book promotion from July 29, 2016 till Aug 02, 2016.
If you are interested in understanding a new form of social order that aims to 1) eliminates all unfairness in the society and 2) encourages progressiveness so as to achieve civilisation advancement; feel free to download my book from the Amazon website.
Link: https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B01IRGB6NI
Thanks :)
Gerard Culhane. Australian (not as a type or an ideology - just a geographic descriptor).Old enough.
Currently back at Uni.
Interests Psychology, Analytic Phil, History of Phil, Sociology, History, Anthropology, blahbedee blah.
Mod
Hello! My name is Israel Arellano. I've come across books by Mortimer Adler, and since then I've had a hunger for philosophy and reading "The Great Books of the Western World".I'm working on my B.S in Biochemistry with a minor in Biology. I'd love to become a well read scientist as Carl Sagan was.
I'm currently reading Nicomachean Ethics by Aristotle, and The Republic by Plato. The only work of philosophy I've read in its entirety is Apology, but hey, we all start somewhere right?
Mod
I'm working on my B..."
Welcome to this group, Israel. It's great that a budding scientist is also interested in philosophy. Many scientists see philosophy as being hopelessly outdated. I wish you the best in your continuing philosophical and scientific pursuits
Hi all!I'm a politics student hoping to do an MA in philosophy. Have a specialist interest in so-called 'enlightenment' thinkers like Mary Wollstonecraft and Thomas Paine but currently getting to grips with communitarians. Bit of a Nietzsche and Foucault fan but as far as contemporary philosophers go, I'm very interested in the work of Slavoj Zizek. Mixed bag really. Happy to read anything that challenges the way I already think so am really looking forward to this group and the different perspectives it will throw my way!
Best,
Enya
Mod
Re your reference to John Cleese on your profile page: "NOBODY expects the Spanish Inquisition!". However, the way things are going on this side of the pond, we may see it before too long.
Alan wrote: "Welcome to the group, Enya.Re your reference to John Cleese on your profile page: "NOBODY expects the Spanish Inquisition!". However, the way things are going on this side of the pond, we may se..."
Thank you, Alan!
Haha yes it looks that way...reflecting upon the tragedy of our political climate tends to result in any glimmer of joy subsiding at which point, I'm compelled to let my mind have a break. Might I suggest watching the Monty Python fish slapping dance on youtube? It's by far their best sketch if ever you need a breather.
Mod
Thanks. I think I've watched all the Monty Python episodes on DVD, but I don't recall that one (it's been a few years). I'll check it out.
Alan wrote: "Enya wrote: "Might I suggest watching the Monty Python fish slapping dance on youtube? It's by far their best sketch if ever you need a breather."Thanks. I think I've watched all the Monty Python..."
I'm so sorry for making this a python group as opposed to a political philosophy discussion but the link's here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lefP0...
Mod
Thanks. I think I've watched all the..."
That's OK. We needed a break from Kant, Hume, Locke, and Plato, whom we were discussing earlier today. Thanks for the You Tube link. I just watched the fish slapping dance. Hilarious! I don't recall seeing that one before. Perhaps it wasn't on the DVD series I watched years ago.
I saw Eric Idle when he appeared in these parts a while ago. I was going to say that it's good to see that he is still going strong at his age, but then I realized that he isn't much older than I!
Alan wrote: "Enya wrote: "Alan wrote: "Enya wrote: "Might I suggest watching the Monty Python fish slapping dance on youtube? It's by far their best sketch if ever you need a breather."Thanks. I think I've wa..."
You're very welcome.
My knowledge of history, political science, philosophy, economics, and law (to mention merely what seem the most relevant subjects) is sketchy, so it’s unlikely that I’ll have much to contribute other than questions.Recently I’ve been rereading Allan Bloom’s The Closing of the American Mind. When I logged on to GR this morning, out of curiosity I typed philosophy into the “Find Groups” search box, and soon found myself here. I scanned the list of discussions and clicked on “USA Constitution and Government.” The comments are lucid and absorbing. It seemed a good idea to join the group so I could explore the threads at my leisure.
Mod
Welcome to this group. I just looked at your Goodreads profile. You have an interesting background.
I read Allan Bloom's The Closing of the American Mind during the late 1980s or early 1990s. I recall agreeing with it in some respects and disagreeing with it in other respects, but I no longer recall the details of my analysis after the passage of more than twenty years. Generally, I prefer Bloom's scholarly writings on political philosophy over this popular presentation, which, to the surprise of his fellow Straussians, became a best seller and a favorite of American conservatives (at least until it was posthumously disclosed that Bloom had been gay and may have died of AIDs). Bloom's translation of Plato's Republic could well be the definitive English translation. Consistent with Straussian translation principles, his translation attempted to be as literal as possible, consistent with acceptable English grammar and style. I read the entirety of this translation when it first appeared in the late 1960s and have frequently consulted it in ensuing decades.
What had intrigued me about The Closing of the American Mind was the idea that in the 20th century a mindset or collective presupposition crucial to character of the United States had undergone a complete change. Formerly, according to Bloom, it had been expected that although factions would be tolerated, the citizen’s responsibility was to adapt himself to the ways of the majority. This was a view that apparently gave way over time to one in which cultural differences and individual expression dominated, with the consequence that it became the role of government to protect minorities, the concept of natural rights having all but vanished.At times I fall prey to the intuition that the general course of American History could be glimpsed from the larger trends. For instance, the political fighting we’re seeing currently makes much more sense in a context in which the people no longer subscribe to the notion of natural rights but as groups are scrabbling for government protections and have thus become adversarial. The extent to which that context is real or imagined is another question.
Mod
Since I haven't read The Closing of the American Mind for more than two decades, I don't recall that argument. Can you cite the pages on which Bloom makes it so I can check it out? It strikes me as inconsistent with the arguments of James Madison and other Founders that individual natural rights are not subject to democratic majoritarian vote. That was, for example, the whole point of the Bill of Rights.
Usually I underline, highlight, and annotate books that I read so that I can go back to them later and find specific discussions. The Closing of the American Mind is the rare exception to that rule. I read it when I was on vacation at my parents' house long ago. My mother had bought and read the book and wanted to know my opinion about it. When I returned to my own home (several hundred miles away), I then ordered my own paperback copy for future reference and possible rereading. Since I never reread it, the copy I possess is totally devoid of any of my usual marks.
It’s at the very beginning, in the introduction, and is summarized on pages 26 and 27.
If I’ve misinterpreted his argument, the joke is on me because the concept he presents on those pages was for me an “Aha!” moment, after which the world suddenly seemed to make a little more sense. It’s those occasional such moments that, for me, make tackling one of these books worth it.
Mod
I don't see Bloom arguing, as you stated in post 145, "that although factions would be tolerated, the citizen’s responsibility was to adapt himself to the ways of the majority. This was a view that apparently gave way over time to one in which cultural differences and individual expression dominated, with the consequence that it became the role of government to protect minorities, the concept of natural rights having all but vanished." As I read it, Bloom is only opposing relativism here. He certainly is not arguing that one must go along with the majority view; in fact, he is objecting here (as he always did, I might add) to the majority view. Moreover, I see no argument on these pages that government should not protect an individual's natural rights (say, to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" or as referenced in the first ten amendments to the Constitution) against majoritarian tyranny.
Hello all,My name is Chris. I am 41 years old. I am a husband, and father of two teenagers. I am currently going to school for my Bachelor's degree in Political Science and Government, as well as, Military Studies. I am also minoring in Global Studies. I am two years into my studies and have another two to go before I graduate. I have been a member of Goodreads for some time now, and today I decided to take a look at the groups within the site.
I read mostly books on Politics, History, and Military History. I wanted to join a group so I could discuss politics with other like-minded people. I am looking forward to getting to know everyone.
Mod
My name is Chris. I am 41 years old. I am a husband, and father of two teenagers. I am currently going to school for my Bachelor's degree in Political Science and Government, as well as..."
Welcome to this group, Chris.
Alan, I’m sorry to have taken so long to reply. At the risk of being tracked down by the copyright watchdogs, I’ll cite a couple of the passages from which I inferred a bigger picture.On page 27, Bloom writes:
“The old view was that, by recognizing and accepting man’s natural rights, men found a fundamental basis of unity and sameness. Class, race, religion, national origin or culture all disappear or become dim when bathed in the light of natural rights, which give men common interests and make them truly brothers. The immigrant had to put behind him the claims of the Old World in favor of a new and easily acquired education. This did not necessarily mean abandoning old daily habits or religions, but it did mean subordinating them to new principles.”
On page 31, he writes:
“For the Founders, minorities are in general bad things, mostly identical to factions, selfish groups who have no concern as such for the common good. Unlike older political thinkers, they entertained no hopes of suppressing factions and educating a united or homogenous citizenry. Instead they constructed an elaborate machinery to contain factions in such a way that they would cancel one another and allow for the pursuit of the common good. The good is still the guiding consideration in their thought, although it is arrived at, less directly than in classical political thought, by tolerating faction. The Founders wished to achieve a national majority concerning the fundamental rights and then prevent that majority from using its power to overturn those fundamental rights. In twentieth-century social science, however, the common good disappears and along with it the negative view of minorities. The very idea of majority--now understood to be selfish interest--is done away with to protect the minorities.”
Bloom, Allan. The Closing of the American Mind: How Higher Education Has Failed Democracy and Impoverished the Souls of Today’s Students. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1987.
Would it be out of place for me to request a thread for The Closing of the American Mind? I feel as though I’ve hijacked the introductions thread, and that wasn’t my intention.
Mod
Thank you for the clarification. Bloom may have been interpreting the Founders in a kind of post-1789 Federalist Party way (Washington and Hamilton, for example) instead of a Jeffersonian-Madisonian Democratic-Republican Party way. The Federalist Party thought that factions were essentially treasonous and tried to repress them with the 1798 Alien and Sedition Acts. They identified "aliens" (recent immigrants, especially those from revolutionary France) with seditious persons. (Sound familiar?) Washington opposed the emerging Democratic-Republican societies (the beginnings of political party organizations) by stating that they were "self created societies" (i.e., not sanctioned by the government). Hamilton himself opposed the Alien and Sedition Acts on tactical grounds, thinking, correctly, that they would destroy the popularity of the Federalist Party once and for all (he was proven right in the Election of 1800 and its aftermath). The Jeffersonian Republicans, who counted among their supporters many recent immigrants, opposed the Alien and Sedition Acts. To the extent, if any, that Bloom takes the Federalist Party position, I disagree with him.
But I note that Bloom specifically referenced "twentieth-century social science . . . ." Bloom, like all Straussians, was opposed to the methodologies of twentieth-century social science, especially in the political science profession. This is a very long story, which I cannot even begin to address in this forum. In general, see the Leo Strauss (1899-1973) and the "Straussians" topic of this group. If you wish to discuss Allan Bloom further at any length, you could post your comments in that topic, as he was one of the most prominent students and followers of Leo Strauss. I would rather avoid too many subject-matter topics, as this group already has a huge number of topics. Nor do I anticipate sufficient discussion of The Closing of the American Mind to merit an entire topic on it. I, for one, have not read this book for more than two decades and accordingly will have little to say about it.
Thank you for your reply, and for the link! I’ll read that thread with interest.
Mod
Washington's exact words were:
"I believe the eyes of all the well disposed people of this Country will soon be opened, and that they will clearly see, the tendency if not the design of the leaders of these self created societies. As far as I have heard them spoken of, it is with strong reprobation. I should be extremely sorry therefore if Mr. M[adiso]n from any cause whatsoever should get entangled with them, or their politics."
George Washington to Edmund Randolph, October 16, 1794, in George Washington: Writings, ed. John Rhodehamel (New York: Library of America, 1997), 886 (emphasis in the original).
By the way, the Fair Use Doctrine permits the use of limited quotations in books and forums such as this. At least, this is the way it works in the USA. I'm not sure what the situation is in other countries. But the Library of America is based in New York City and is, accordingly, a US publisher.
Mod
The Straussian position on twentieth-century social science is discussed at some length in the "Facts" and "Values" topic in this group, especially posts 1, 4, and 10-20 thereof.
Political Philosophy and Ethics
Books mentioned in this topic
A Brief History of Philosophy: From Socrates to Derrida (other topics)A History of Western Philosophy (other topics)
An Economy of Want (other topics)
Kafka Unleashed: Stories, Dreams & Visions (other topics)
Threeway: A Short Novel for a Long Season (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Seneca (other topics)Augustine of Hippo (other topics)
Georgina T. (other topics)
Welcome to the group, Ben. We have members from all over the world, including the UK. You will also find that different members have different views on political philosophy, economics, and ethics. As long as members comply with the rules at the head of the group, there is no ideological litmus test for membership.